Disentangling the Relationship between Frailty and Intrinsic Capacity in Healthy Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A...

Frailty and intrinsic capacity (IC) are distinct but interrelated constructs. Uncertainty remains regarding how they are related and interact to influence health outcomes. We aim to understand the relationship between frailty and IC by identifying subgroups based on frailty criteria and IC domains and studying one-year outcomes.

We studied 200 independent community-dwelling older adults (mean age 67.9±7.9 years, Modified Barthel Index (MBI) score 99±2.6). Frailty was defined by modified Fried criteria. Scores (range: 0-2) were assigned to individual IC domains (cognition, psychological, locomotion, and vitality) to yield a total IC score of 8. To identify subgroups, two-step cluster analysis was performed with age, frailty and IC domains. Cluster associations with one-year outcomes (frailty, muscle strength (grip strength, repeated chair stand test), physical performance (gait speed, Short Physical Performance Battery), function (MBI) and quality-of-life (EuroQol (EQ)-5D)) were examined using multiple linear regression adjusted for age, gender and education.

Three distinct clusters were identified - Cluster 1: High IC/Robust (N=74, 37%); Cluster 2: Intermediate IC/Prefrail (N=73, 36.5%); and Cluster 3: Low IC/Prefrail-Frail (53, 26.5%). Comparing between clusters, IC domains, cognition, depressive symptoms, nutrition, strength and physical performance were least impaired in Cluster 1, intermediate in Cluster 2 and most impaired in Cluster 3. At one year, the proportion transitioning to frailty or remaining frail was highest in Cluster 3 compared to Cluster 2 and Cluster 1 (39% vs 6.9% vs 2.8%, P<0.001). Compared to Cluster 1, Cluster 3 experienced greatest declines in grip strength (β=-4.1, P<.001), MBI (β=-1.24, P=0.045) and EQ-5D utility scores (β=-0.053, P=0.005), with Cluster 2 intermediate between Cluster 1 and Cluster 3.

Amongst independent community-dwelling older adults, IC is complementary to frailty measures through better risk-profiling of one-year outcomes amongst prefrail individuals into intermediate and high-risk groups. The intermediate group merits follow-up to ascertain longer-term prognosis.